Hi Ken, The scenario you described regarding remote Traversal from a GLV is automatically handled.
The GLV would provide code similar to the existing implementation we already have, which can be found here: https://github.com/JetBrains/youtrackdb/blob/develop/core/src/main/java/com/jetbrains/youtrackdb/api/gremlin/YTDBGraphTraversalSourceDSL.java#L95 Andrii Lomakin, YouTrackDB development lead. On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 6:40 PM Ken Hu <[email protected]> wrote: > > What does this mean if someone tries to send a remote Traversal from a GLV? > I'm guessing that is what makes "1. Providing DSL that does the same call" > necessary. I think that scripts and traversals need to have the same > capabilities "out of the box" when using the GLVs. So while I think this is > a good idea, I would also like to see a proposal on what can be done for > remote Traversals. > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2025 at 9:47 AM Andrea Child > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Andrii, > > > > I like your idea as it would improve readability of traversals to be able > > to reference the service directly in the grammar instead of via the call > > step. Looking forward to the contribution! > > > > Andrea > > > > From: Andrii Lomakin <[email protected]> > > Date: Wednesday, November 5, 2025 at 8:15 AM > > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > > Subject: Proposal: Intorduction of equalence between call(serviceName, > > args:List) and method call in scripts > > > > Good day, colleagues. > > > > I would like to propose an approach to enhancing the extensibility of the > > Gremlin script, which, although it does not solve all problems, will make > > many Gremlin extensions feel native. > > The Idea, as you may have already guessed from the title, is simple: if a > > service is registered in TinkerPop to treat it as a method call with > > parameters, such as args: List<Object> as an argument. > > > > So call like: g.schemClass("User") will be translated to > > g.call("schemaClass", "args" : ["User]) > > > > In such a case, providers will extend Gremlin twofold: > > 1. Providing DSL that does the same call. > > 2. Registering related service. > > > > If you agree with this proposal, I would be glad to contribute it, as I > > mentioned, it does not solve all issues, such as the usage of custom > > predicates, but I am under the impression that it can be extended to that > > case too in the future. > >
